Opinion
Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Jodie Chester, Editor Marc Harrell, Business manager
Gerry Doyle, Managing editor Jamie Holman, Retail sales manager
Ryan Koerner, Managing editor Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser
Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser Justin Knupp, Technology coordinator
wednesday, October 21, 1998
Robert Novak / KANSAN
Editorials
Delayed financial aid causes unfair burdens on students
The University has new consequences for students who do not pay tuition on time. The change will monetarily punish students receiving financial aid who, under the old rules, were unduly punished with an inconvenience.
Previously, the first time a student tuition payment was missed that student's schedule was dropped, forcing him or her to re-enroll. The rule change mandates that students pay a $25 to $100 fine, which is tacked onto tuition, instead of having their enrollment dropped.
The real victims are students receiving financial aid. If financial
Students are punished with fines for circumstances beyond their control.
aid checks do not arrive in time to meet the tuition deadline, the students get fined.
These students are the link in this process that has the least control of these circumstances, yet they are the ones hurt the most by it.
Student receiving financial aid may not have the money, and tuition can no longer be paid by credit card. Students are stuck either paying the
fine or borrowing the money
The Office of Student Financial Aid advises students to apply for aid before March 1. The earlier the proper information is received, the easier it is for those sending financial aid checks to get them to the proper destination.
However, the University should ensure that students are not penalized for not receiving financial aid checks. There should be a line of communication between the Office of Financial Aid and the enrollment center to make sure these students that were previously hit in day planner aren't now hit in the wallet.
Erinn R. Barcomb for the editorial board
University needs policy for spouses
Department heads and administrators at the University of Kansas deserve congratulations for maintaining open policies on hiring spouses.
There is an unwritten rule that academics tend to marry each other. Among more than 1,000 faculty members at the University, several married couples exist. Fortunately, as a large research university with thousands of students, a greater need for more professors and instructors exists. Hiring couples to professorships, therefore, is less difficult than at smaller institutions.
Paul and Ruth Ann Achley joined the department of psychology this fall as assistant professors. Both had been involved in post-doctoral research at the University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign, and they
Larger schools have an advantage in being able to hire professor couples.
were entertaining offers to teach at different universities.
Ruth Ann Aatchley initially was the only one to receive an offer; luckily, both were able to positions at the University. Paul Aatchley said that had that not been the case, they would have been forced to commute about eight hours each weekend to see each other.
Paul Atchley said hiring couples was difficult for most departments to do and usually is rare. He said that a bias exists against couples and that most don't wear their wedding rings to those interviews.
It is fortunate that the University seems to avoid this bias. The University should look to peer institutions and adopt a policy on the matter.
Both Arizona State University and the University of Iowa actually encourage married instructors to apply. Instructors do not need to fear that marital status may play a role in their possible employment.
Such a policy would have to be carefully enforced. If too many married couples were hired, Chancellor Robert Hemenway's plan to increase the number of minority faculty, for instance, could be hindered by a lack of openings.
Most importantly, administrators should continue to prioritize the quality of KU faculty. All other factors are secondary.
Kansan staff
Chris Borniger for the editorial board
Ann Premer . . . Editorial
Tim Harrington . . Associate Editorial
Aaron Marvin . . News
Gwen Olson . . News
Aaron Knopf . Online
Matt Friedrichs . Sports
Kevin Wilson . Associate sports
Marc Sheforgen . Campus
Laura Roddy . Campus
Lindsey Henry . Features
Bryan Volk . Associate features
Roger Nomer . Photo
Corie Waters . Photo
Angie Kuhn . Design, graphics
Melissa Ngo . Wire
Sara Anderson . Special sections
Laura Veazey . news clerk
News editors
Stacia Williams ... Assistant retail
Brandi Byram ... Campus
Mi'ah Kafitz ... Regional
Ryan Farmer ... National
Matt York ... Marketing
Stephanie Krause ... Production
Matt Thomas ... Production
Tracie Meisenheimer ... Creative
Tenley Lane ... Classified
Sara Cropper ... Zone
Nicolle Farrell ... Zone
Jon Schlitt ... Zone
Shannon Curran ... Zone
Matt Lopez ... Zone
Brian Allers ... PR/Intern manager
Advertising managers
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"The present is great with the future." — Leibnitz
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
How to submit letters and guest columns
Guest columns: Should be double-
spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kanson newsroom, 111 Staufer-FlinFil Hall. The Kanson reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Ann Premer (premer@kanson.com) or Tim Harrington (tharrington@kanson.com) at 864-4810. If you have general questions or comments, email the staff page (opinion@kanson.com) or call 864-4810.
University should foster personal development
Perspective
The recent horrible murder of Matthew Shepard, a 21-year-old University of Wyoming student, has made me recall a much different incident in the struggle
a much different incident for civil rights at the University of Wooming.
On Oct.17, 1969, Lloyd Eaton, coach of the University of Wyoming football team, winners of the Western Athletic Conference title for three consecutive years, suspended 14
Partha Mazumdar
Guest Columnist
African-American players from the team. University of Wyoming was to play Brigham Young University the following day, and the 14 were
planning to protest against the Mormon racial policy that excluded African Americans from the priesthood.
The University of Wyoming president, William Carlson, and the Wyoming governor, Stanley Hathaway, backed Eaton. When seven university faculty members threatened to resign unless the 14 were reinstated, the Touchdown Club in Casper, Wyo., announced that it was raising money to get the seven faculty members out of the state.
The University of Wyoming Student Senate called for a hearing on the issue, and the student body called for an impeachment of the Senate. The student-run newspaper supported the 14 players, and the editor of the paper resigned. Probably not realizing what he was saying, Carlson said at a press conference that football came first and civil rights second. One member of the legislature said if Eaton backed down, the university's budget would be in trouble. The suspensions stood, and 10 of the 14 players would leave the University of Wyoming before graduating.
Near the center of this controversy was a young, not yet 30-year-old, professor of English and American Studies. In 1969, he was just 10 years out of high school and four years out of graduate school where he had written his dissertation on the novels of Charles Brockton Brown. He supported the 14 players and would later dedicate his first book, "The Black Novelist," to them.
Being a university president is an extraordinarily difficult job.
In addition, a university president also has to efficiently administrate an enormous budget and ensure that the budget grows. Most importantly, regardless what the surface similarities may lead one to believe, a university president is not a chief executive officer of a large corporation. A university is a site of education, personal development and research. University presidents provide the moral direction for their institution.
The various constituencies to whom university presidents report — undergraduate students, graduate students, alumni, boosters, staff, faculty, legislatures, media, taxpayers, regents and trustees — always want something, and none of them are easily appeased.
For those who haven't guessed it by now, the young University of Wyoming professor was Robert Hemenway, chancellor of the University of Kansas.
Because I think so highly of Chancellor Hemenay as a person, it is difficult for me to write objectively about him. Notwithstanding his commencement address last spring during which he described the value of a KU education solely in terms of how much more money graduates would earn over their lifetimes, I am sure he still realizes that a university education is much more than just taking classes that prepare one for the job market.
A university education, in the tradition of a liberal arts education, fosters our personal and intellectual development into interesting citizens. In this respect, a university is a moral institution. A university does not accomplish this by telling us what to do in the antiquated tradition of a university in loco parentis but through its classes, campus, activities and faculty. A university provides an environment in which we all can develop.
Consequently, it is up to all of us, not just the chancellor but every member of the university community, to provide an environment where everyone including gays, lesbians, bisexuals, straights, African Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans and Caucasians can participate in this education.
This does not simply mean that we all should be protected from hate crimes — we already should be protected from violence — but we all should encourage an environment that fosters our development into whomever we are becoming and allows us to be free and autonomous individuals. Perhaps this is the legacy each of us can leave for Matthew Shepard at the University of Kansas.
Mazumdar is a Pittsburgh, Pa., graduate student in American studies.
Free speech justifies running controversial advertisement
I would like to make it clear that the beliefs expressed in this advertisement are not the views of The University Daily Kansan. This is a paid advertisement that expresses the beliefs of CODOH. The issues debated and the sources used in the ad do not reflect the feelings of the Kansan.
to cause a little uproar. like to explain my justification as the Kansan business manager for publishing the advertisement.
Marc
Harrell
Kansas Business Manage
I expect the presence of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODH) advertisement appearing in today's paper to cause a little unproper. Therefore, I would
The University of Kansas is a campus that allows for open discussion on various issues. The Kansan is a direct reflection of those freedom of speech values. A joint statement was released on Sept. 23, 1998, by Chancellor Robert Hemenway and Provost David Shulenburger. This statement explained why the abortion protest was allowed on campus. "The University of Kansas, as a public university, is a place where the First Amendment must be exercised and the free exchange of ideas allowed. While we regret the pain to some members of the university community that results from that free exchange, the University must maintain its role as a forum for reasonable dialogue."
The Kansan has the right to refuse any ad upon my review. I think that CODOH has a First Amendment right to place an advertisement with us. The First Amendment says that everyone has a right to be heard, no matter what their viewpoint. In this situation, I did not agree with the message, but whether I believe the content of an advertisement does not justify my rejection. If this were the case, there would be many ads that would not run. Unless an advertisement has false information or directly attacks another person or group, there is no reason to reject the advertisement. In this instance, the ad neither directly attacked anyone nor had false information (the sources were double checked).
In addition to content, I look to see if an ad is really advertising a reward, discount, special
Some people may say that my decision was based on money. This statement could not be further from the truth. The cost of this one ad is minimal compared to what we bring in on a daily basis. I thought about rejecting the ad unless the group paid a substantial amount of money and ran it numerous times. Then I thought, when do you put a price on freedom of speech?
I am not a censor. I will not reject an ad just because it causes an uproar. Also, my opinion is that this advertisement is just a radical person trying to spark a debate. Hopefully, this ad will bring about an open forum on campus and allow the exchange of ideas.
I brought this decision up to my managers at a meeting. After several minutes of debate, one manager asked, "What would a major newspaper do?" This comment helped me make my decision. The Kansan thrives because we function like a professional newspaper. The awards that we have won attest that our day-to-day operation is comparable to that of a professional newspaper. Recently, full-page advertisements ran in both USA Today and The Wall Street Journal that gave phone numbers that gay readers could call and a group of religious people would make them "ungay." Neither newspaper supported the advertisement, but the papers chose not to reject the ad. The decision made by these national newspapers helped me to make my decision.
I do not agree with the issues addressed by CODOH. However, I would like to think that if I had a belief that I wanted to advertise, no matter how absurd, that I would be allowed to express my feelings. Hopefully, this advertisement will foster an open forum and get people talking about a subject that they typically might overlook. I support freedom of speech and never would want to be put in a place where I become a censor.
or other incentives. In the CODOH situation, the group is advertising a reward and is asking for information leading to the whereabouts of David Cole, the Jewish writer and director of CODOH's video on Auschwitz. Based upon the reward and freedom of speech, I chose to accept the advertisement.
1. ___
.
Harrell is a Wichita senior in journalism.